For example, I don't know what Glenn Reynolds means by "I've got your man right here" in his post that links to me. I'm not involved in any conservative bloggerly equivalent of Journolist, nor has any fellow blogger of note ever emailed me to suggest that I get on the same page with others to serve some larger goal.
I genuinely don't know whether Glenn is doing some sort of Alpha Male routine, whether he's tweaking Weigel as a Beta Male or if he's serious that David Weigel is the Journolist member with the best justification for sending me the whole Journolist archive (after I requested a Journolist "Deep Throat").
Now, it does make sense to me that Weigel should do it. He's been hurt, shot down. So he might feel like striking back in some extravagant way. But, more important, he's the one with the biggest interest in getting the whole archive out. His statements have been leaked out of context, and what he wrote might seems quite moderate if we could read what everyone else was saying — if we could understand the culture of Journolist.
Our need for the full context, in order to understand the part that is already public, will be #1 on a list — help me add to it — of why the entire Journolist archive needs to be made public.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२५ टिप्पण्या:
I have no clue what you are going on about here, Ann Althouse. I just want to see the whole archive for shits and giggles, myself.
I think that Glenn is pointing out that Jim Treacher of DC Caller, MAY have much of the JournoList archives - because he's the guy who blew the whistle on Dave Weigel. So if he doesn't actually have them, he may know someone who does.
Insta's 'right here' link was to the photo only. It was a gag.
I think you're jumping the gun on this one. He was just quoting your headline (or whatever it's called in blogging) as the set up.
She is digging in on this one like a mole dog with its entire head under ground.
Althouse, that these people can skew the news coverage is reason enough for this list to become public.
If this was anything that they thought was above board, it wouldn't be this dark secret.
It's a bad obsession...
Now I really am convinced, there's got to be a backstory here.
Glenn does link to a post asking if this list could be viewed as a violation of anti-trust laws, as it served as a jobs program for liberal writers.
No--Weigel has an interest in keeping the archive private (assuming he has retained the entire archive) since he is most likely to be able to profit by writing a book or articles about the entire phenomenon.
I don't think it's all that complicated. "right here" links to a picture of Dave Weigel. Glenn is pointing out that he's your best source, since he's (a) a known JournoLister, and (b) no longer has much reason to keep confidence with the Journolisters.
Althouse throws down the gauntlet to Ezra Klein. Klein responds "No one has ever done this to me before. I never even pulled my sister's pigtails. I want my Mommy".
The main point here--which (suckup alert) Althouse has identified--is that this is not just a standard gossipy Inside Baseball story.
If the archive gets public, it will quite likely be a Gate--Listgate for short. A BIG story.
Just how lazy and corrupt have our national media become? Inquiring minds want to know.
Keep digging, doggie.
As others above have noted, Reynolds linked to a photo of the late Mr. Weigel via a Treacher post.
Weigel would be the Mark Felt in this "Ratf***gate" leaking information to you (or someone) about the inner workings of the list.
Dunno, my guess is that the list would consist almost entirely of a group of folks sneering at their lessers.
That would be everyone not on the list. Well, maybe some of them too.
Besides, who is really interested in reading the charming writings of Eric Alterman? The man simply oozes sincerity.
Ann: Are you really going to write that book? That's a lot just for reading through the Journo-files.
Can you imagine the collective chill coursing through the veins of all those Journolisters, wondering if and when the goings on in their secret boys' club will be thrown wide open to the public? They're all probably desperately asking themselves (with a hat tip to the Watergate era, their perceived finest hour), "What did I say, and when did I say it?"
"Ann: Are you really going to write that book? That's a lot just for reading through the Journo-files."
I said I would write a book about it if I could get the material.
Not being telepathic, I still found Instapundit's meaning clear; if you want someone who probably has a the material, and who has a reason to burn Journolist and the twits running it, Weigel would be the guy to work with.
Depends on whether you want to be given the material or whether you want to dig for it. Weigel's the guy if you want to dig.
Somebody send Althouse the archive. Her book will probably be a lot more interesting than just about anyone else's book on the same subject. Something more than a partisan gotcha.
If a partisan of either side writes a book about Journolist, it won't be worth reading because you won't know what is in and out of context. It needs somebody who's not into activism and narrative.
Much ado about nothing
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/06/after-journolist/
Lynch, good point.
VZA, you use a link to Yglesias at ThinkProgress.org to dismiss the story?
It must be nice to be able to do a free-range auto-colonoscopy. Or maybe not.
Althouse, your quote and Reynolds answer is here: "I need a Deep Throat.” I’ve got your man right here."
Reynolds is merely saying Weigel is the man to give you the material to write your book. Sometimes a statement is just a statement.
"I said I would write a book about it if I could get the material."
Instapundit says Weigel can give you the material.
Ann,
Can you seriously imagine a context in which "ratf**ker" would sound "quite moderate?" That ought to be good!
Can you seriously imagine a context in which "ratf**ker" would sound "quite moderate?"
It would depend on the rat's personality, I suppose.
Can you seriously imagine a context in which "ratf**ker" would sound "quite moderate?" That ought to be good!
FWIW, I've seen it mentioned that it is a kind of journo-jargon. If so -- if it has some particular denotative usefulness -- that may (just may) mitigate its use in some contexts.
It's a damn ugly term though. Can't mitigate against that.
I think that Glenn is pointing out that Jim Treacher of DC Caller, MAY have much of the JournoList archives - because he's the guy who blew the whistle on Dave Weigel.
Huh? No, they never would've let me into their club, even if I'd wanted to join. I'd have sullied their ideological purity.
And Jonathan Strong is the author of that piece.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा